Sixth Circuit· 5/15/2012
Clemente v. VASLO
Citations
- 679 F.3d 482
- 2012 WL 1673921
- 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 9746
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- issues “adverted to … in a perfunctory manner, unaccompanied by some effort at developed argumentation,” are deemed waived
- “‘[M]ere speculation, conjecture, or fantasy’ [is] insufficient to survive a motion for summary judgment.” (quoting Lewis v. Philip Morris Inc., 355 F.3d 515, 533 (6th Cir. 2004))
- “‘[M]ere speculation, conjecture, or fantasy’ [is] insufficient to survive a motion for summary judgment.”
- issues raised in a perfunctory manner are deemed waived
- issues raised in a perfunctory manner are deemed waived
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Martin and McKeague, Circuit Judges Caldwell, District Judge
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
14 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Denise Coley v. Lucas County, OhioSixth Circuit· 2015-08-21· cited 291×
- Howard Linden v. City of Southfield, Mich.Sixth Circuit· 2023-07-26· cited 18×
- Woodcock v. City of Bowling GreenW.D. Kentucky· 2016-02-24· cited 15×
- John Moody v. Michigan Gaming Control BoardSixth Circuit· 2015-06-16· cited 13×
- Boone v. Mountainmade FoundationDistrict of Columbia· 2014-08-20· cited 11×
- TC Reiner v. CanaleE.D. Michigan· 2018-03-15· cited 8×
- Cummerlander v. Patriot Preparatory Academy Inc.S.D. Ohio· 2015-02-09· cited 7×
- Stanley v. Expressjet Airlines, Inc.E.D. Michigan· 2018-12-07· cited 7×
- Min Li v. Qi JiangN.D. Ohio· 2014-08-13· cited 4×
- Boyer v. PetersenW.D. Michigan· 2016-10-27· cited 1×
- Ricks v. PauchE.D. Michigan· 2018-05-30· cited 1×
- Reed v. Proctor & Gamble Manufacturing Co.W.D. Tennessee· 2013-02-27· cited 1×
- Davis v. PickellE.D. Michigan· 2013-03-26· cited 1×
- Hill v. WhitfordW.D. Michigan· 2014-10-14
Cites
36 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court· 1986-06-25· cited 135,235×
- Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court· 1982-06-24· cited 22,846×
- Pearson v. CallahanSupreme Court· 2009-01-21· cited 13,928×
- Katz v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1967-12-18· cited 13,304×
- Anderson v. CreightonSupreme Court· 1987-06-25· cited 12,768×
- Schneckloth v. BustamonteSupreme Court· 1973-05-29· cited 11,783×
- Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. DoyleSupreme Court· 1977-01-11· cited 7,445×
- United States v. MendenhallSupreme Court· 1980-06-30· cited 6,313×
- Brosseau v. HaugenSupreme Court· 2004-12-13· cited 2,748×
- Wilson v. LayneSupreme Court· 1999-05-24· cited 2,678×
- Thaddeus-X and Earnest Bell, Jr. v. BlatterSixth Circuit· 1999-03-08· cited 2,642×
- Crawford-El v. BrittonSupreme Court· 1998-05-04· cited 2,583×
- Jett v. Dallas Independent School DistrictSupreme Court· 1989-06-22· cited 2,093×
- Roberts v. United States JayceesSupreme Court· 1984-07-03· cited 2,030×
- Moore v. City of East ClevelandSupreme Court· 1977-05-31· cited 1,904×
- Ashcroft v. al-KiddSupreme Court· 2011-05-31· cited 1,740×
- Garrity v. New JerseySupreme Court· 1967-01-23· cited 1,543×
- Everson v. LeisSixth Circuit· 2009-02-20· cited 1,111×
- Gardner v. BroderickSupreme Court· 1968-06-10· cited 696×
- Filarsky v. DeliaSupreme Court· 2012-04-17· cited 597×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.